Ucluelet is backing out of its plan to charge tourists parking fees after a congestion of opposition revved up against it.
The plan called for visitors from outside the West Coast to be charged a flat daily rate of $10 to park their vehicles for one-day, $27 for three days or $45 for seven days. Annual parking passes would be available to frequent visitors for $50.
The fees would be in place year-round and in effect on all public roadways.
The idea was first introduced in October, 2023, by the district’s then-CAO Duane Lawrence who suggested the revenue brought in could help cover the costs of “forecasted infrastructure deficits that we know the municipality is experiencing.”
In June, 2024, council voted 3-2 in favour of moving ahead with the fees and another vote to implement them was held in October of that year receiving unanimous support from council.
The fees were part of a Traffic and Parking Bylaw set to be adopted during the town’s April 29, 2025, municipal council meeting, but a flurry of opposition cascaded across local social media channels and residents packed into the meeting seemingly united in their eagerness to voice opposition.
The meeting’s agenda included delegation presentations from Lara Kemps, who wrote that she would be representing “Concerned Citizens’ and Craig Stewart of the Ucluelet Chamber of Commerce, both of whom were expected to object to the plan.
The agenda also included four letters from residents opposing the fees.
Civic unrest quickly turned to civic appreciation however as Mayor Marilyn McEwen moved the pay parking discussion to the top of the agenda ahead of the delegations and letter reviews, explaining enough opposition had been heard.
“The delegations can still present, but I just think we’ll save some time by admitting that we need to put a pause on this program, potentially,” McEwen said.
She then deferred to the district’s manager of corporate services Ed Chow who explained council could delay the fees to allow further community engagement and added that further opposition had been heard at recent information sessions held for stakeholders and residents.
“We heard a lot of concerns about the parking program, similar to the letters we received as correspondence,” Chow said
McEwen responded that she was leaning towards “putting a pause on this program.”
“Based on the amount of correspondence, there is obviously more public engagement to be done,” she said. “There is some misinformation in some of these letters, but there’s also a lot of really good questions and I think the public needs the opportunity to get their questions answered.”
Coun. Jennifer Hoar agreed and suggested better access to the district’s conversations around pay parking should be looked into so that the public had a more accurate idea of the plan and a survey conducted in April, 2024 should be updated.
“The original survey should be possibly redone because it was a little too black and white about a couple of things and there were a lot of misconceptions in that survey,” she said.
McEwen reiterated that along with misinformation were also “really good questions.”
“I think they need to have answers and we don’t actually have all the answers at the moment, so going back to review our options with the whole parking program, I think, makes a lot of sense,” she said.
Coun. Mark Maftei said he was “happy to pause” the fees, but added that opponents to it would need to be active and engaged in any input processes.
“This is a matter in which I think council has a real responsibility to solicit as much input from the public as possible. Based on the correspondence and based on the conversations that I’ve received, I feel that our responsibility at this point is to continue to engage with the public, but I feel that the public also has a responsibility to engage with the process as it’s established,” he said.
“A lot of the information that I received from people amounted to accusations that this was being slipped through at the last minute. This process has been happening in public in open meetings for over a year now. We’ve had a lot of good input.”
Council’s vote to put a pause on the fees and offer more community engagement to residents was unanimous.
Following the vote to delay, both scheduled delegations thanked council for listening to residents.
“I just want to say thank you very much to mayor and council for listening to all the comments that you’ve received and for moving forward with some more public input on this process,” said Adele Larkin, speaking on behalf of Lara Kemps and Concerned Citizens.
“I think that’s what we’ve all been hoping for and certainly everything that I’d written down to say today was basically making that request because we do see this as an incredible impact to tourism, to the people who live here and our businesses and the people who count on us to put food on their tables through operating successful businesses.”
McEwen responded that the district hopes to work more closely with the Chamber of Commerce and Tourism Ucluelet to receive feedback.
“They are the ones representing our businesses in town,” McEwen said.
Craig Stewart spoke on behalf of the chamber and said he agreed with Maftei that the public has a responsibility to be engaged with the process.
“I think we have great ability to collaborate. Sometimes conflict is just inherent in the process and I always learn from conflict,” Stewart said, adding it’s imperative to make tourists feel welcome in the community while balancing the needs of residents.
. “I’m excited about what’s coming for Ucluelet in all kinds of ways. There’s such promise. People are coming here. There’s such great people in town running great businesses. I think this is an opportunity to address a conflict that really is serious and pervasive, but one we can all learn from in terms of a way to collaborate effectively.”
